For those too lazy to go back and read the original post, here's how things start out:

Originally by:"Zeriel Meholick"One of the pilots in one of our war target corporations has a neutral alt with an Orca. Now, appropriately, neutrals who remote-repair a legitimate target become legitimate targets themselves. However, that does NOT hold true if a war target utilizes the ship maintenance facility on an Orca to switch ships with no docking lag mid-fight. I propose that if you have kill rights on a target, and that target uses the ship maintenance facilities of an Orca (or carrier, I suppose, but it's more moot in lowsec/null), kill rights should be given on the Orca pilot in the same way they are currently given to neutral repairers.

Much clamoring of carebear paws and honeypots commences. CSM delegate Trebor Daehdoow all but gloats, saying:

Originally by:"Trebor Daehdoow"I love it when I find out about sleazy loopholes like this. It restoreth my soul. But at the same time: supported.

As of now, this issue is supposedly being presented (along with 199 other issues ) to CCP for review.

Now, I'd like to open this thread back open for discussion for a few reasons:

A.) I don't think a barely 2 page thread merits this being a closed issue.

B.) I find that an elected member of the CSM who has a frightening amount of power over this calling a working-as-intended game mechanic a "sleezy loophole" simply because it does not fall in line with their play-style more than slightly disturbing.

C.) Most importantly, I've just now seen the original thread and its locked and I wants to open my mouth.

Quote:Help, I'm at war with a corp and they can fly battleships, while my corp cannot. I propose that we either remove battleships from the game, or flag pilots who fly then with GCCs in order to make things fair.

...seems a tad ridiculous wouldn't you say?

I should not have to tell you that Eve is by no means a fair game, and I'm sorry to say that there are, and always will be, people who have advantages over others in this game. What can I say, it's an imperfect universe.

The mechanism you're referring to of pilots using an orca to switch ships during battle is a fully (oh please don't make me say it) WORKING AS INTENDED GAME MECHANIC (there, are you happy now?). From CCPs original dev blog on the release of the orca in 2008:

Quote:The ship maintenance bay is very useful for moving a few ships out to a new location, either in space or a station, and also has the benefit of allowing your corp or fleet members to either refit in space or arrive in fast ships and switch to a mining barge or other ship. Also this makes moving rigged ships around much easier with it being the first ship which uses stargates to also have a ship maintenance bay and moves throughout empire.

Doesn't look broken does it? What you're suggesting isn't a "needed game balancer", it's a solution to YOUR problem. I might add that rorquals and carriers both utilize ship maintenance bays that function in the exact same way. Would these changes effect the mechanisms of ALL ship maintenance bays or just the ones giving your war targets a leg up on you?

Looking at it another way, is ship-swapping out of an orca really any different than a neutral alt/friend bringing you a ship and ejecting it from it? Under current gameplay, this does not flag the neutral, but why stop with neutral orcas? What about neutral station-bumpers? Or how about flagging scammers as red to the corporation of the individual they just ripped off? What's next, flagging people for salvaging wrecks? (I couldn't help myself)

The guys with the neutral orcas aren't cheating; they aren't exploiting an oversight, utilizing hacks, or using the negative multipliers of a wormhole to create infinite tracking on turrets ( ). What they're doing is out-gunning you. Believe me, the people who use them spent a considerable amount of real time or real isk to have them, and there's a reason for that.

So what you're really talking about here isn't a broken game mechanic, it's called escalation. When null fleets started using area-of-effect doomsdays, they countered with range-dictating sniper BS fleets. Those were countered by logistics-heavy armor HAC fleets, and sooner or later, someone smart will probably figure out a way to counter that. These are the ways things work.

SO,as for your problems with war targets using neutral orcas, I propose another solution:

I dunno, maybe some novel, out-of-the-blue thing like "I agree and or disagree, and here are my reasons.

I don't think the argument here is, or even should be, whether it's okay to use an Orca to rapidly switch ships mid-combat. The argument is whether it makes sense for you to be fighting someone who uses an Orca in that manner, shooting the Orca, and getting CONCORDdokened.

Posted - 2010.10.30 15:23:00 -
[9]
I've gotta say, I support Aiden's viewpoint here. If someone uses a tactic, you find a way to counter it. Like wardeccing that neutral Orca Pilot's Corp. Or something similar. This is EVE after all.

Originally by:Mara RinnShould we add 30 second session timer to pods when you are ejected from your exploding ship?

This one, at least, exists.

Onto the main point: Dueling is a dead art. If you're going to 1v1 with a wartarget, make sure there's no Orca around. If you're going to actually fight the war, then bring some more friends and pop the guy before he can switch. Or just keep putting his ships down into hull until he has no choice but to lose one. Then pod him.

Posted - 2010.10.31 00:48:00 -
[13]
People shouldn't be able to swap ships in mid combat period. If the enemy was in an orca and could be shot I wouldn't mind as much, but if the orca can sit there with a load of ships and coninuously pump out new ones for the WT with no reprocusions, theres something wrong.

Posted - 2010.11.01 13:52:00 -
[14]
EVE's not about being "fair."But it is about providing a full SF background for our silly PVP and PVE shenanigans.

So I'm not going to complain too much even if "CONCORD passes new rules of engagement" and the Orca providing the hot-swap now goes blinky red, even though I never mine and trained up two Orca pilots in different alliances just to hot-swap and/or move groups of ships in high sec. If I whine because CONCORD now treats me like an accessory to an incident when I actually am one, then I'm just being silly. And I agree with the point that people shouldn't be able to continuously swap out ships in the middle of combat without being insta-podded.

So though it may be unfair to some piwates to close this loophole, I'd not whine about it.

But I'd really, really love it (and consider using the trick) if the Orca only went blinky-red aggression-wise if it were on the same grid, and was able to hot-swap with impunity elsewhere in the system. ;)

Originally by:Chainer CygnusI've gotta say, I support Aiden's viewpoint here. If someone uses a tactic, you find a way to counter it. Like wardeccing that neutral Orca Pilot's Corp. Or something similar. This is EVE after all.

Yes lets wardec federal navy academy, right?

Seems like risk averse wardeccers at work here. Eve is supposed to be harsh and all that, so if you directly aid flagged people in your mining support ship you also should be flagged and not be too scared of combat.

Posted - 2010.11.01 20:52:00 -
[17]Edited by: Xorv on 01/11/2010 20:55:02I support the original proposal in part 1

Quote:[...] that if you have kill rights on a target, and that target uses the ship maintenance facilities of an Orca (or carrier, I suppose, but it's more moot in lowsec/null), kill rights should be given on the Orca pilot in the same way they are currently given to neutral repairers.

Also, support this sentiment...

Originally by:FournonePeople shouldn't be able to swap ships in mid combat period. If the enemy was in an orca and could be shot I wouldn't mind as much, but if the orca can sit there with a load of ships and continuously pump out new ones for the WT with no [repercussions], there's something wrong.

Posted - 2010.11.03 17:51:00 -
[19]Edited by: Captain Charismatic on 03/11/2010 17:54:42Edited by: Captain Charismatic on 03/11/2010 17:53:23Well. Props to Aiden here. I constantly use this tactic. Mostly for its pure WTF factor. Carebears will always be present. They will always want easy ways to do things others actually work to find a way to counter. Of course they just want aggro rights.

Obviously, the original tear fountain comes from someone that fell victim to this tactic. Now really, don't you think CCP knows about it? It's working as intended. It is not unfair. If you want the same thing, train an orca alt, get in a shuttle when I start shooting you, and fly the hell away. It's not that hard.

Complaining about it because you don't wanna find a reasonable way to counter it is what 90% of EVE will do. And for the CSM rep that gloated about it.. Really? Because you obviously have the sway to get it fixed right Nao, amirite?

We (general rule-bound griefers) enjoy it when someone stands up and points fingers at us. We found a mechanic we can make use of, you ***** about it, we lol. Life goes on.

Posted - 2010.12.29 15:57:00 -
[22]Edited by: Lex Starwalker on 29/12/2010 15:58:51Great post Aiden, I heartily agree. The last thing EVE needs is to be made easier. I wish CSM would spend their time on a more worthwhile proposal, like a way to eliminate AFK missioning (sleeper AI in high sec anyone?).

Honestly, though, I wouldn't be too worried about it. CCP has a great handle on their vision for the game. It's fairly obvious that if they didn't intend this use of the Orca from the beginning (I would argue they did), that they at least don't have a problem with it. I don't think CCP is going to let any CSM proposal ruin their game, no matter how popular or unpopular it is.

By some magic of logic that doesn't make sense, if I had to protect alts I use to fight people that would somehow make the game 'easier' and thus is unacceptable. I propose that Concord protecting the alts which I use to kill you is definitely 'harder' and totally agrees with the hardcore spirit of the game. I further propose that RR alts with normal aggro mechanics just aren't hardcore enough and I demand my alts be able to supply the equivalent to RR support without receiving any aggro at all.

Aggro for what amounts to RR is just way too softcore, I even further propose that all aggro be removed from all support actions in the game. Can't shoot my RR? Get your own noob. My alts are ECCM/tracking/sensor boosting me and you can't shoot them? Should have brought your own of course. BALANCE.

COPYRIGHT NOTICEEVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.